ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
Role of path information in visual perception of joint stiffness.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Co-contraction embodies uncertainty: An optimal feedforward strategy for robust motor control.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Humans have an astonishing ability to extract hidden information from the movement of others. In previous work, subjects observed the motion of a simulated stick-figure, two-link planar arm and estimated its stiffness. Fundamentally, stiffness is the relation between force and displacement. Given that subjects were unable to physically interact with the simulated arm, they were forced to make their estimates solely based on observed kinematic information. Remarkably, subjects were able to correctly correlate their stiffness estimates with changes in the simulated stiffness, despite the lack of force information. We hypothesized that subjects were only able to do this because the controller used to produce the simulated arm's movement, composed of oscillatory motions driving mechanical impedances, resembled the controller humans use to produce their own movement. However, it is still unknown what motion features subjects used to estimate stiffness. Human motion exhibits systematic velocity-curvature patterns, and it has previously been shown that these patterns play an important role in perceiving and interpreting motion. Thus, we hypothesized that manipulating the velocity profile should affect subjects' ability to estimate stiffness. To test this, we changed the velocity profile of the simulated two-link planar arm while keeping the simulated joint paths the same. Even with manipulated velocity signals, subjects were still able to estimate changes in simulated joint stiffness. However, when subjects were shown the same simulated path with different velocity profiles, they perceived motions that followed a veridical velocity profile to be less stiff than that of a non-veridical profile. These results suggest that path information (displacement) predominates over temporal information (velocity) when humans use visual observation to estimate stiffness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.